Despite Damning Report, U.S. Blames Taliban for Airstrike Deaths

U.S. forces made serious mistakes and violated their own guidelines on the use force during deadly airstrikes in western Afghanistan, according to an interim Pentagon report. But American military officials in Kabul are still insisting that their troops did the right thing, during the May 4th assault on the village of Garani that left dozens of civilians dead. It’s the Taliban who are to blame for the loss of innocents’ lives, these officials say.

“The fact remains that civilians were killed because the Taliban deliberately caused it to happen,” Lt. Commander Christine Sidenstricker, a spokesperson for U.S. Forces Afghanistan, tells Danger Room.

The Garani firefight has become a flashpoint in the war in Afghanistan. Secretary of State Clinton, President Obama, and U.S. ambassador to Kabul Karl Eikenberry have allapologized for the 25 or more civilians killed there. Afghan president Hamid Karzai has called for end an to American airstrikes. U.S. commanders rebuffed that plea — but pledged to do more to limit collateral damage, when American aircraft attack from the skies.

“General Thomas determined that the targets that had been struck posed legitimate threats to Afghan or American forces,” the paper says. But in “several cases,” he “determined either that the airstrikes had not been the appropriate response to the threat because of the potential risk to civilians, or that American forces had failed to follow their own tactical rules in conducting the bombing runs.”

One plane was cleared to attack Taliban fighters, but then had to circle back and did not reconfirm the target before dropping bombs, leaving open the possibility that the militants had fled the site or that civilians had entered the target area in the intervening few minutes.

In another case, a compound of buildings where militants were massing for a possible counterattack against American and Afghan troops was struck in violation of rules that required a more imminent threat to justify putting high-density village dwellings at risk, the official said.

“In several instances where there was a legitimate threat, the choice of how to deal with that threat did not comply with the standing rules of engagement,” said the military official, who provided a broad summary of the report’s initial findings on the condition of anonymity because the inquiry was not yet complete.

Marc Garlasco, a senior military analyst with Human Rights Watch, hopes the review will push the American military to implement more stringent tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) to minimize civilian casualties. After an incident last year in Azizabad killed 70 or more bystanders, Garlasco tells Danger Room, “we saw civilian casualties from airstrikes drop to virtually zero significantly reduced over a nearly 8-month period. That in itself showed the U.S. military knew how to and could implement TTPs to minimize civilian deaths from airstrikes. For that reason I was struck by the Garani incident and wondered what had changed that led to so many deaths. Now we know – the military, for whatever reason, failed to follow their strict guidelines and civilians paid the price.”

But Sidenstricker, the military spokesperson, takes a very different view. “There is nothing — in the story, or that we’ve seen or heard elsewhere — that says our actions led to additional collateral damage or civilian casualties,” she says. “And regardless, the fact remains that civilians were killed because the Taliban deliberately caused it to happen. They forced civilians to remain in places they were attacking from.”

Sidenstricker and other U.S. military officials believe weapon sight video and intelligence intercepts taken from the incident will prove their case. That audio and video could be released within the week, they say.

Here’s The Thing With Ad Blockers

We get it: Ads aren’t what you’re here for. But ads help us keep the lights on. So, add us to your ad blocker’s whitelist or pay $1 per week for an ad-free version of WIRED. Either way, you are supporting our journalism. We’d really appreciate it.